Server - Client based networking for Family History Centres.

[russellhltn]

The benefits as I see it for Active directory is the centralisation of user accounts and the ability potentially for those users to roam around the network and still have access to their data.

The bulk of FHCs I know of have 2-3 user accounts: Admin, Patron and maybe Staff. Individual logins would be far more work then it's worth.

On the administrative computer side, we're still under the directive that all users of MLS must use the same login. Confidential information is not to be stored on hard drives, but physically locked away.

A centralized file storage area is nice, but I fail to see how a system as typically found in a business would be a good idea.

[Aczlan]

The benefits as I see it for Active directory is the centralisation of user accounts and the ability potentially for those users to roam around the network and still have access to their data

I like the idea of storing the CDs and other information that all patrons will need in a central location as well as networking the printers, but I am against storing personal information on FHC owned hardware.
I realize that you are trying to make it easier on the patrons, but remember that you are taking on the responsibility and/or liability of keeping the data safe.
What happens if someone gets into someone else's documents?
Or if the server crashes and loses the only copy of someone's genealogy?
Or if the file doesn't save correctly and the information/documentation for the 6 generations that they extracted from the film that just went back to SLC is lost?

I think it is a great idea in theory, but if something were to go wrong, you could have some unhappy patrons on your hands (at best).

Aaron Z

[carljokl]

Multiple Patron accounts was not really what I had in mind. Any extra accounts would be for ward and stake roles.

[carljokl]

The question of individuals getting into other individuals documents in particular if the Server were used for any Stake roles is one of the advantages of using a full Client - Windows Server approach. It is designed for proper security for controlling access to individuals personal documents. This doesn't work so well in a peer to peer environment because there isn't a central authoritative list of user accounts for the network. I hadn't really thought about accounts for specific Patrons but in many cases, if I put in place some scheduled backup, data on the network is probably in practice safer that in many members homes where they either don't know about backups or do not backup on a regular basis.

I know the whole active directory thing is fairly overkill, not least of which because Active Directory was a solution based on authenticating against several servers and only one Server computer exists on the network. If there is an issue with someone else taking over who is not competent in looking after that kind of setup I would take responsibility for downgrading to something they can handle. I don't have practical experience yet of how much work is involved in setting up Active Directory and the subsequent maintenance because I have not done it before and am still learning. I accept ahead of time this project might not work out. I started this thread because I was curious if anyone else had attempted anything like this before. There are other technical people in the Church with the knowledge to do it after all not to mention some of those having deep pockets to afford to pay for some things the Church won't provide.